Critical Appraisal of a Quantitative Study

Appraisal of a Quantitative Study
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation Appraisal of a Quantitative Study
Research Methods (Research Design)
"Revalidation of a Perioperative Risk Assessment Measure for Skin" by Meehan et al. (2019) uses a review of a retrospective chart to analyze surgical patients who are 18 years old or above. Researchers used a quantitative research design to obtain accurate information from Midwest quaternary care, a 1500-bed capacity hospital. Additionally, the research period was six months, which was enough time to gather and analyze the data collected (Meehan, Beinlich, Bena, & Mangira, 2019). Since the study's primary objective was to increase the generalizability of the perioperative risk assessment measure for skin (PRAMS), researchers used a large sample population size.
Population and Sample
By using a 1500-bed hospital, researchers had access to a good sample population to study. Indeed, their primary outcome was to validate the perioperative pressure injury (PI) assessment of risks, which are considered cumbersome to finish. Meehan et al. (2019) wanted to ensure no missed opportunity to identify and prevent the increased risk of having a postsurgical PI (Meehan et al., 2019). Therefore, the most significant thing that researchers did was choose the appropriate sample size to ensure that they did not miss any crucial details that would enhance the external validity of revalidating the PRAMS.
Data Collection and Measurement
Meehan et al.'s choice of using a retrospective chart review was the best. Specifically, it appears that researchers did not want to lose any vital information that would have compromised their measurement or data collection. When selecting a 1500-bed capacity hospital, these individuals were careful to gather accurate data to analyze and give the appropriate feedback. Furthermore, they had six months, which enabled them to know some risk indicators for the development of postsurgical PI, namely age, Braden score, preexisting PI, diabetes, previous surgery, and surgical time.
Research Procedures
The most significant thing in any study is the procedure used to gather and analyze the data collected. On that note, Meehan et al. (2019) chose the right strategy, which involved selecting the best sample size and reviewing the retrospective chart to avoid losing vital information (Meehan et al., 2019). Researchers also identified risk indicators for a postsurgical PI, namely predictive, specificity, and sensitivity values. That is why the study took six months since everything was done in an orderly manner, which enabled researchers to consider various risk factors.
Results...